Dr. Anthony Fauci spent decades near the top of the federal health bureaucracy. A new Republican bill is designed to make sure he never comes back.

Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., reintroduced legislation Friday that would potentially impose a lifetime ban on future federal employment for officials who unlawfully withhold information from Congress or are convicted of perjury. McCormick revived the measure two days after Fauci refused to answer more than 100 questions during a nearly three-hour Senate hearing into the government’s handling of COVID-19.

The legislation is called the STOP the SWAMP Act, a title that does not exactly arrive on tiptoe.

McCormick argued that federal employees should face workplace consequences when they refuse to explain their official conduct to congressional investigators. “You have the constitutional right” to invoke the Fifth Amendment, McCormick said, but he compared the situation to an employee refusing to explain why money was missing from a cash register. “If you don’t want to answer questions about what you did wrong, we should be able to fire you,” he said.

The proposal would apply beyond Fauci. According to McCormick’s office, it would prohibit certain individuals from returning to federal employment after refusing to provide required information to Congress, and it would strengthen lawmakers’ ability to refer alleged obstruction for prosecution.

The legislation has not become law, and Fauci is not currently charged with a crime. But the political pressure surrounding him intensified after his extraordinary appearance before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The committee’s official hearing record identifies Fauci as the sole witness for the July 29 session. He appeared under subpoena before a panel chaired by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., his longtime and bitter congressional adversary. Fauci began with a statement accusing Paul of conducting an “unhinged” campaign to put him in prison. “The sole reason he is calling me before this committee,” Fauci said, was to coax him into saying something that could support Paul’s repeated calls to see him “behind bars.”

Then came the refrain that would define the hearing. “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer,” Fauci repeatedly told senators while invoking his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. He used that response more than 100 times, including when Republicans asked seemingly innocuous questions about the day of the week and the color of his tie.

Paul argued that Fauci was not entitled to remain silent because former President Joe Biden had issued him a broad preemptive pardon before leaving office.

That pardon covered federal offenses connected to Fauci’s government service between January 2014 and January 19, 2025. It did not cover later conduct, including any potential false statement made during the 2026 hearing.

Fauci’s lawyers have countered that the pardon did not eliminate every possible legal risk. Answering questions under oath could expose him to new allegations of perjury or false statements, they argued, particularly before a chairman who has publicly demanded his prosecution.

That dispute is now headed toward a possible congressional showdown. Paul announced that the committee would vote on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress. He did not immediately specify whether he would seek criminal contempt, civil enforcement or another remedy.

Paul accused Fauci of dishonesty, poor judgment and an abuse of power stretching across his years as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “History will judge,” Paul said, describing Fauci’s record as a story of “dishonesty, misjudgment” and extraordinary hubris.

Fauci has consistently denied lying to Congress or concealing information about the origins of COVID-19 and federally funded coronavirus research conducted through EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. His attorney, David Schertler, called Paul’s pursuit “an obsessive vendetta” and said the accusations against Fauci were “false and disgraceful.” Schertler was removed from the hearing room after attempting to speak without being recognized by the chairman.

Democrats described the proceeding as a predetermined prosecution masquerading as oversight. “This hearing is designed to entrap you,” Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., told Fauci.

Sen. Gary Peters, the committee’s ranking Democrat, called it an effort to legitimize a conclusion Republicans had reached years earlier. More than 150 scientists and infectious-disease experts also signed a letter defending Fauci and urging lawmakers to end what they described as political “witch-hunts.”

Republicans saw a former federal official who was willing to direct public policy, defend mandates and lecture Americans from the government’s most powerful platforms—but suddenly had almost nothing to say when placed under oath.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., put it bluntly. “I think I know why you’re doing it,” Hawley said of Fauci’s repeated invocation of the Fifth. “It’s because you don’t want to answer questions.”

The dispute was sharpened by Paul’s release of more than 1,100 pages from Fauci’s pandemic-era diary. Republicans argue that the private entries conflict with portions of Fauci’s previous public testimony on school closings, the origin of the virus and his influence over pandemic policy. Fauci’s defenders say many of the entries reflect the uncertainty of a fast-moving health emergency rather than evidence of misconduct.

Whatever the legal outcome, McCormick is now attempting to transform one contentious hearing into a broader rule for Washington: federal officials who refuse lawful congressional oversight should not be allowed to return later for another government title, office and taxpayer-funded paycheck.

The bill faces an uncertain path through Congress. But after more than 100 invocations of the Fifth Amendment, Republicans have apparently heard enough silence.